Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
leader harry reid. so we have a very good relationship. and i think that's one that we're going to maintain through this thing. and i would say that senator reid on numerous occasions was concerned about republican nominations. during the bush era we had steven johnson. steven johnson, who incidentally, was a democrat for the e.p.a. administrator. i thought he'd be good. i think that there are several democrats that thought he would not be good, and so harry reid did what he's supposed to do. he interceded in behalf of the democrats who opposed him. well, they had a 60-vote margin. that's fine. they got 61 votes. dirk kempthorne was one that there was objection to. he was up for -- most of you remember him, a former senator from utah. he was up for the secretary of interior, and there are some people objecting to him. and of course that was back during the bush administration. he was nominated and he went ahead and he was confirmed. it was a 60-vote margin. there's nothing unusual about this. getting back to steven johnson, this is even more analogous to what we have what now, b
a balanced budget amendment the kind of things that endear people in the republican primary voter. and harry reid spent more money than any of the other candidates in order to get the weakest republican into the general election knowing that they had a very difficult uphill fight in missouri and sure enough they got the weakest candidate and he blew himself up with the infamous current about illegitimate rape. >> you say it is to put in more quote electable candidates. the conservative wing of the republican party says the most eledgable is the most moderate and that is not necessarily the people they want to see running for office. >> lock, look, looking, look, look, look, let's be clear about this. cross roads support for tea party candidates. we are the largest financial backers of tea party candidates for the senate and the house. we spent over $30 million for tea party senate candidate. over $25 million for house candidates. $2.9 million for marco rubio. more than any other group in the general election. $2.7 million for rand paul. $8 million in colorado for ken buck. $5.1 million in ne
speaker boehner, senate democratic leader harry reid, and nancy pelosi, the house democratic leader, will attend the meeting on friday at the white house. on c-span we have been talking to capitol hill reporters about the potential impact of the sequester. here's a look at how it might be affecting the education department. >> joining us now from domination week is reporter allison klein, she's on the phone to talk about what she's education cuts could mean. good morning. we heard the education secretary call them dumb cuts. what the republicans calling the potential cuts to education? >> that's funny. they have been pretty quiet about that. i think it's a losing issue to come out and say we really want to make sure we cut programs like title 1, disadvantaged students, head start programs like that. so they have been fairly quiet when it comes to the education cuts and sequestration. >> let's look at some of the specifics, the white house is warning about a 8.2% across-the-board for most education programs. what else are we seeing? >> actually with the s.s.i. .3% cut because of some
president. we met with john boehner and his leadership team. we met with harry reid and his leadership team. our message was we think it is very important that governors have a seat at the table. we are partners. we wanted to make sure there were a few principles we could lay out. one is to the extent money is taken off of federal spending but he shifted to state spending, that does not accomplished much for our constituents. my view is that that they understood. they have reached out to us. we are pleased with the outrage. the main bipartisan message to us is that governors should continue to have a seat at the table. we know cuts are coming. we do not want to suffer disproportionately. we want input. >> does sequestration protect the states any more than other alternatives? >> look. if you take a look at it and when you say "states," it is important that we can talk about the impact. you're talking about the impact on the people we serve. the state of vehicles on of service. it covers everything from substance abuse treatment to head start to work force training. one of the frustrations f
and approve the senate nomination, harry reid said he'd like a full senate vote either wednesday or thursday. the armed services committee met this morning to look at the upcoming sequester. those automatic defense cuts set to happen march 1. and they heard from among others the chairman or the joint chiefs of the -- the chief of staff of the army, general ray odierno. >> the fiscal outlook, which the army faces in fiscal year threen and to my hodge -- 2013 and to my knowledge is dire and unprecedented. by the budget control act of 2011, the combination of the continuing resolution, a shortfall -- excuse me -- the -- a shortfall in overseas contingency operation funds for afghanistan and the sequester in fiscal year 2013 has resulted in a $17 billion to $18 billion shortfall to the army's operation and maintenance accounts. as well as an additional $6 billion cut to other programs. all of this will come in the remaining seven months of this year. the fiscal year 2013 fiscal situation will have grave and immediate readiness impacts by all forces not serving in afghanistan or forward in korea.
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)